Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
The effectiveness of distance-based interventions for smoking cessation and alcohol moderation among cancer survivors: A meta-analysis
Show others and affiliations
Number of Authors: 82020 (English)In: Psycho-Oncology, ISSN 1057-9249, E-ISSN 1099-1611, Vol. 29, no 1, p. 49-60Article, review/survey (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Objective The objective of this study is to evaluate current evidence for the effectiveness of distance-based interventions to support smoking cessation (SC) or alcohol moderation (AM) among cancer survivors. Secondary, differences in effectiveness are explored regarding multibehaviour interventions versus single-behaviour interventions targeting SC or AM only. Methods A systematic search of PubMed, PsycINFO, Web of Science, EMBASE, CINAHL, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials was conducted. Intervention studies with and without control groups and randomized controlled trials were included. Random effects meta-analyses were conducted for the main outcomes: SC and AM rates at the follow-up closest to 6 months. Using subgroup analyses and meta-regression, effectiveness of single-behaviour versus multibehaviour interventions was evaluated. Results A total of 17 studies with 3796 participants; nine studies on SC only, eight studies on multibehaviour interventions including an SC or AM module, and no studies on AM only were included. All studies had at least some concerns regarding bias. Distance-based SC interventions led to higher cessation rates than control conditions (10 studies, odds ratio [OR] = 1.56; 95% CI, 1.13-2.15, P = .007). Single-behaviour SC interventions reduced smoking rates compared with baseline (risk difference [RD] = 0.29; 95% CI, 0.19-0.39, P < .0001), but multibehaviour interventions did not (RD = 0.13; 95% CI, -0.05 to 0.31, P = 0.15). There was insufficient evidence that distance-based multibehaviour interventions reduced alcohol use compared with controls (three studies, standardized mean difference [SMD] = 0.12; 95% CI, -0.08 to 0.31, P = .24). Conclusions Distance-based SC interventions are effective in supporting SC among cancer survivors. Single-behaviour SC interventions appear more effective than multibehaviour interventions. No evidence was found for the effectiveness of distance-based AM interventions for cancer survivors.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2020. Vol. 29, no 1, p. 49-60
Keywords [en]
alcohol, cancer, cancer survivors, effectiveness, interventions, meta-analysis, oncology, smoking cessation
National Category
Public Health, Global Health and Social Medicine
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:su:diva-177804DOI: 10.1002/pon.5261ISI: 000503650100001PubMedID: 31663182OAI: oai:DiVA.org:su-177804DiVA, id: diva2:1387327
Available from: 2020-01-21 Created: 2020-01-21 Last updated: 2025-02-20Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMed

Authority records

Berman, Anne H.Verdonck-de Leeuw, Irma M.

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Berman, Anne H.Verdonck-de Leeuw, Irma M.
By organisation
Department of Public Health Sciences
In the same journal
Psycho-Oncology
Public Health, Global Health and Social Medicine

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn
Total: 30 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf